I had read The Idiot around college days, a long time ago. Found it bland, was perhaps too young. However, listening to the text, and especially as read by the late Martin Geeson, I was absolutely amazed at how wonderful this book is,
Mr. Geeson's portrayal of the characters, (he only read parts 1 & 2, alas) his clarity of diction, and general pace are all superb, and simply amazing. I was especially struck at the humor in the material, something I had not noticed 50 years ago.
2 asides: not everyone should try to portray vocally the various characters; this is something which is beyond most readers, but not Mr Geeson; also, I find the old Constance Garnett translation to be in no way inferior to the newer "sexy" over hyped (imo) translations. There I've found 'much ado about nothing.' But to each his own.

A splendid reader, Jan Moorehouse, has completed the reading of Dostoyevsky's 'Idiot'. I'm sure you will approve of her narration and will want to congratulate her.

I know that Marting Geeson has done a massive amount of reading for librivox. So I am thankful for his read of parts 1 and 2 of "the idiot" Dostoevsky's favorite and for me one of greatest novels/tome ever written. At the very least 3 and 4 should have been done by a collaboration of readers. I took a listen to one or two of the incomplete 3 and 4. The reader has an adequate voice and that reader is scheduled to read all of 3 and 4. But since no one has that supple and seamless differentiation of vocalizations of characters, I think parts 3 and 4 will not come close to the great reader Martin Geeson's 1 and 2. I have listened to several commercial versions and the reader does not come close to Martin's humanity, expression of emotions, easy human pace, and his supple and subtle vocalizations
At least 3 and 4 would have been easy to listen to with a variety of readers. sigh....One should have sympathy for Roghzin and Nastasia. They were both abused, the former by his father the latter by Totsky. In clip 19 Rogozhin makes the ultimate point that I am sure Pavlov(the great Russian exponent of classical conditioning)would agree: R replies to the Prince, in so many words(not a quote): We do not chose, are personalities are formed by others in our formative years. It is only when we gain the affection of good persons then we can chose, but even here what we are from the treatment of others in our formative years, is is more difficult to alleviate and change for the better than physical illness. Our conditioned personalities and actions are inflicted, "nurtured". The genetic and neurobiological psychiatry of today has cause and effect backwards, and is so corrupted by drug companies by the medicalization of the psychological misery or madness we suffer.

I have the most ill feelings towards Totsky. Madame Epachine was quite colorful. vacillating between childishness, to outrageous verbal cruelty and than moments later being quite apologetic. Martin did an excellent job verbally portraying Madame Epanchin.